Characteristics of Volatile Compound Adsorption from Alcoholic Model Solution onto Various Activated Carbons

알코올모델용액을 이용한 여러 종류 활성탄의 휘발성화합물 흡착특성

  • Park, Seung-Kook (Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Lee, Myung-Soo (Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kim, Byung-Ho (Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kim, Dae-Ok (Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Kyung Hee University)
  • 박승국 (경희대학교 식품생명공학과) ;
  • 이명수 (경희대학교 식품생명공학과) ;
  • 김병호 (경희대학교 식품생명공학과) ;
  • 김대옥 (경희대학교 식품생명공학과)
  • Received : 2010.06.17
  • Accepted : 2010.08.11
  • Published : 2010.08.30

Abstract

Ten commercial activated carbons (ACs) prepared from four different sources (bamboo, wood, peat, and coal) were evaluated for their adsorptive efficiency of six volatile compounds (isoamyl alcohol, hexanal, furfural, ethyl lactate, ethyl octanoate, 2-phenyl ethanol) which were dissolved in a 30% alcoholic model solution. These six volatile compounds are frequently found in alcoholic beverages and possibly contribute to physiological hangover due to their high concentrations. They are also generally regarded as off-flavor compounds at certain levels in alcoholic beverages such as whisky and vodka. Two hundred mL of 30% alcoholic solutions containing these six volatile compounds were treated with 0.2 g of ACs while stirring for 16 hr; the treated solutions were then measured for their adsorptive efficiencies (or removal efficiencies) by gas chromatographic analysis using two different sampling methods (direct liquid injection and headspace-solid phase microextraction). The adsorptive efficiencies of the ACs varied depending on the identity of the volatile compounds and the source material used for making the ACs. Ethyl octanoate, 2-phenyl ethanol, and hexanal were removed at high efficiencies (34-100%), whereas isoamyl alcohol, ethyl lactate, and furfural were removed at low efficiencies (5-13%). AC prepared from bamboo showed a high removal efficiency for isoamyl alcohol, aldehydes (hexanal and furfural), and 2-phenyl ethanol; these major fusel oils have been implicated as congeners responsible for alcohol hangover.

4가지 서로 다른 소재(대나무, 목재, 피탄, 석탄)로 제조된 10가지 활성탄에 대해서, 30% 알코올모델용액에 용해되어 있는 6가지 휘발성화합물(isoamyl alcohol, hexanal, furfural, ethyl lactate, ethyl octanoate, 2-phenyl ethanol)의 흡착효율을 평가하였다. 이들 6가지 휘발성화합물은 알코올음료에서 종종 발견되며, 농도가 높을 경우에는 숙취의 원인이 될 뿐만이 아니라 위스키나 보드카와 같은 술에서 이취의 원인물질이 되기도 한다. 6가지 휘발성화합물이 용해되어 있는 30% 알코올모델용액 200 mL에 0.2 g의 활성탄을 넣고 16시간 일정한 속도로 교반한 후에 처리된 용액을 2가지 시료처리방법(direct liquid injection and headspace-solid phase microextraction)을 이용 GC분석을 수행하여 활성탄의 제거효율을 구하였다. 활성탄의 제거효율은 휘발성화합물의 종류와 활성탄제조의 소재에 따라 차이가 있었으며, ethy octanoate, 2-phenyl ethanol, hexanal에 대한 제거율은 34-100%로 높은 편이나, isoamyl alcohol, ethyl lactate, furfural의 제거율은 5-13%로 비교적 낮은 편이었다. 활성탄의 종류에 따른 제거율은 대나무활성탄인 A가 isoamly alcohol, hexanal, ethyl lactate, furfural 등 대부분의 휘발성화합물에 대해서 유의적으로 높았으며(p < 0.05), 특히 알코올음료에서 숙취와 이취물질이며 fusel oil의 주성분인 isoamyl alcohol, aldehydes(hexanal, furfural), 2-phenyl ethanol에 대한 흡착효율이 높은 것으로 확인되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Bak YC, Cho KJ, Choi JH. 2005. Production and $CO_2$ adsorption characteristics of activated carbon from bamboo by $CO_2$ activation method. Korean Chem. Eng. Res. 43: 146-152.
  2. Berry, DR. 1989. Manipulation of flavour production by yeast : physiological and genetic approaches. In: Distilled beverage flavours. Pigott JR & Paterson A (eds), Ellis Horwood, Cambridge, England, pp. 299-307.
  3. Cantagrel, R. 1989. A scientific approach to quality control for Cognac spirits. In: Distilled beverage flavour-recent developments. Piggott JR & Paterson A (eds). Ellis Horwood, Chichester, England, pp. 117-132.
  4. Cho KJ, Bak YC. 2004. Production of activated carbon from Bamboo by gas activation method. Ener. Eng. J. 13: 166-172.
  5. Choi, JH, Lee HJ, Kim WJ, Park HG, Cho, JS, Heo JS. 2001. Adsorptive removal of 2-methylisoborneol and geosmin in raw water using activated carbon and zeolite. Korean J. Environ. Agric. 20: 244-251.
  6. Conner JM, Birkmyre L, Paterson A, Piggott JR. 1994. Interac-tions between ethyl esters and aroma compounds in model spirit solutions. J. Agric. Food Chem. 42: 2231-2243. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf00046a029
  7. Conner JM, Birkmyre L, Paterson A, Piggott JR. 1998. Headsapce concentrations of ethyl esters at different alcoholic strength. J. Sci. Food Agric. 77: 121-126. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0010(199805)77:1<121::AID-JSFA14>3.0.CO;2-V
  8. $C_{60}$ Bamboo, http://www.c60bamboo.com/content/What_is_Bamboo_ Charcoal.htm, Accessed June 1, 2010.
  9. Damaris JR, Howland J, Arnedt JT, Almeida AB, Greece J, Minsky S, Kempler CS, Sales S. 2010. Intoxication with Bourbon versus Vodka: effects on hangover, sleep, and next-day neurocognitive performance in young adults. Alcoholism: Clin. Exper. Res. 34: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2009.01101.x
  10. Damrau F, Goldberg AH. 1971. Adsorption of Whisky congeners by activated charcoal. Southwestern Medicine. 52: 179-182.
  11. Damrau F, Liddy E. 1960. Hangover and whisky congeners comparison of whisky with vodka. J. National Med. Assn. 52: 262-265.
  12. Fukuda K, Watanabe M, Asano K, Ueda H, Ohta S. 1990. Breeding of brewing yeast producing a large amount of phenylethyl alcohol and phenylethyl acetate. Agric. Biol. Chem. 54: 269-271. https://doi.org/10.1271/bbb1961.54.269
  13. Grant DR & Higuchi T. 1990. The solubility of organic compounds. Wiley, New York, USA.
  14. Ha SD, Shim SK, Lee CO, Lee JO. 2003. Trends in R&D and functionality of activated charcoal. Food Sci. Ind. 36: 99-105.
  15. Herry C, Baudu M, RAveau D. 2001. Estimation of the influence of structural elements of activated carbons on the energetic components of adsorption. Carbon. 39: 1879-1889. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-6223(00)00310-9
  16. Jun HB, Na KJ, Seo TK, Park SM. 2008. Removal of taste and odor by powdered activated carbon adsorption and air stripping. J. Kor. Soc. Water and Wastewater. 22: 455-460.
  17. Noh SY, Kim KH, Choi JH, Han SD, Kil IS, Kim DH, Rhee YW. Adsorption characteristics of VOCs in activated carbon beds. J. Korean Soc. Atmospheric Environ. 24: 455-469. https://doi.org/10.5572/KOSAE.2008.24.4.455
  18. Park YC, Cho KJ, Choi JH. 2005. Production and $CO_2$ adsorption characteristics of activated carbon from bamboo by $CO_2$ activation method. Kor. Chem. Eng. Res. 43: 146-152.
  19. Ra DG, Kim ES, Jo C, Jung SC, Lee GD. 2008. Comparison of Methylene Blue Adsorption by Activated Carbones. J. Kor. Soc. of Environ. Tech. 9: 75-79.
  20. Rohsenow DJ, Howland J, Arnedt JT, Almeida AB, Greece J, Minsky S, Kempler CS, Sales S. 2010. Intoxication with Burborn versus Vodka: effects on hangover, sleep, and next-day neurocognitive performance in young adults. Alcohol Clin. Exp. Res. 34: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2009.01101.x
  21. Son MS, Kim SD, Woo KJ, Park HJ, Seo MC, Lee SH, Ryu SK. 2006. Adsorption characteristics of three-components volatile organic compounds on activated carbonaceous adsorbents. Korean Chem. Eng. Res. 44: 669-675.
  22. Swift R, Davidson D. 1998. Alcohol hangover. Alcohol Health & Research World. 22: 54-60.
  23. Tamon H & Okazaki M. 1996. Influence of acidic surface oxides of activated carbon on gas adsorption characteristics. Carbon. 34: 741-746. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(96)00029-2
  24. Watts VA, Butzke C, Boulton RB. 2003. Study of aged Cognac using solid-phase microextraction and partial least-squares regression. J. Agric. Food Chem. 51: 7738-7742. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf0302254